In the 21st century, do we need a monarch?

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • Well I would much prefer any of the Royals, ( even Andrew!!), to represent the country than another Blair!!

    Same here. That democracy lark doesn't seem to be working out very well.

  • Oh, noooo,

    I would always prefer someone elected, at least you get the option to get rid of them after a time.

    Well I would much prefer any of the Royals, ( even Andrew!!),

    All Andrew has done is fill his own pockets with his personal business dealings in the MIddle East using the royal name to do it, so he would not be my first choice to take over from the Queen.

  • Oh, noooo,

    I would always prefer someone elected, at least you get the option to get rid of them after a time.

    All Andrew has done is fill his own pockets with his personal business dealings in the MIddle East using the royal name to do it, so he would not be my first choice to take over from the Queen.

    You are still confused I see.....the Executive is formed from the UK 'elected' assembly.....the Royal's 'power' is merely 'constitutional'....in other words, they have no powers of governance....whereas scumbag Blair DID!! I wouldn't want Blair to be identified with anything British....but in any event, as has been pointed out before - the British head of Government is not an 'elected' position....... and nor is it technically 'democratic' either.

  • Oh, noooo,

    I would always prefer someone elected, at least you get the option to get rid of them after a time.

    All Andrew has done is fill his own pockets with his personal business dealings in the MIddle East using the royal name to do it, so he would not be my first choice to take over from the Queen.

    I would have thought that Harry would be top of the majority of UK citizens's list......but Harry has made it clear that HE doesn't want it......and I would have thought that Harry would be the peoples first choice by a mile!.....but what a comment to make about 'filling one's pockets' after the 'elected' Blair' performance!!

    Edited once, last by Stevlin (June 26, 2017 at 9:51 PM).

  • William and Kate are fine. Harry is a maverick. Kate is a beautiful, elegant replacement for the typically 1980s Diana. But the fact that it takes a genuine commoner to be regal today spells the end of the supremacy ethic for monarchs. Harry's recent dip into emoting is just not done. He is over egging his little pudding, whatever it might be.

  • During the 80s, the two daughters in law were brought in to modernise a dying institution. Anne, in contrast, was portrayed as an unglamorous, out of touch aristo. When the 80s marriages fell apart, she was suddenly transformed into a selfless, humble, charity worker. Andy went from 'war hero' to useless freeloader. Now, with Anne an Andy's children frankly irrelevant, the 'talent pool' is too small. The media can't even make their minds up about Harry, lest Wills turns out to be a boob.

  • They all do charity work Plastic, I agree, but boy do they get rewarded heavily for it.

    I'll open a hospital or two, if I could get chauffeur driven around and live the lifestyles that they have.

    Well perhaps you could point out what head of State doesn't??? However, It continues to amaze me when Republicans continue to moan about the £45 million sovereign grant paid to the Head of the Commonwealth in view of the ridiculous Multi-billions that are wasted in foreign aid.....never mind that needless Mult-billionsubsidising that EU!!

    'Get Real' is a term that springs to mind!

  • I would be interested to know, apart from the American president, if any other head of state gets as much as the royal family. Note, the family bit. We don't just pay for one of them, but a whole tribe of them and all associated costs like security for them.

    £50m. Hah! That would've been bad enough, but you need to add an additional 0 on there.

  • They all do charity work Plastic, I agree, but boy do they get rewarded heavily for it.

    I'll open a hospital or two, if I could get chauffeur driven around and live the lifestyles that they have.

    As long as I didn't have the fame. There's things in my life I'm still aiming to improve but right now if it were a straight choice between my life and one of the main royals lives it would definitely be mine, no hesitation.

  • I would be interested to know, apart from the American president, if any other head of state gets as much as the royal family. Note, the family bit. We don't just pay for one of them, but a whole tribe of them and all associated costs like security for them.

    £50m. Hah! That would've been bad enough, but you need to add an additional 0 on there.

    Oh dear - you Republican doubters!! Ignoring that fatuous 0.7% GDP overseas waste, which, unlike the UK Monarchy, is undoubtedly unique - and makes the sovereign grant look a mere pittance. However, you don't have to take my word for it......Oliver 2nd - http://royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/insight/…ink-again-40065, but in any event, now look at what the Crown Estate puts into the Treasury- not to mention the tourism element.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36643314

    An additional 'O'??? You really shouldn't make things up as you go along you know!

  • As long as I didn't have the fame. There's things in my life I'm still aiming to improve but right now if it were a straight choice between my life and one of the main royals lives it would definitely be mine, no hesitation.

    Hardly an amazing revelation is it? If it was a straight choice of your life or that of a stranger, you would no doubt make the same choice.............as would most others!

  • Oh dear - you Republican doubters!! Ignoring that fatuous 0.7% GDP overseas waste, which, unlike the UK Monarchy, is undoubtedly unique - and makes the sovereign grant look a mere pittance. However, you don't have to take my word for it......Oliver 2nd - http://royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/insight/…ink-again-40065, but in any event, now look at what the Crown Estate puts into the Treasury- not to mention the tourism element.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36643314

    An additional 'O'??? You really shouldn't make things up as you go along you know!

    I will come back to you on this in a few days.:)

    Regards

    Oliver the 2nd

    8):P

  • Many would choose the royal's money or fame, or both.

    So?? Many people would love to win the lottery too.....but in comparison with the ridiculous 'option' that was posed, the chances of winning the national lottery would seem to be odds on!!

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!